About Me

My mother was murdered by what I call corporate and political homicide i.e. FOR PROFIT! she died from a rare phenotype of CJD i.e. the Heidenhain Variant of Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease i.e. sporadic, simply meaning from unknown route and source. I have simply been trying to validate her death DOD 12/14/97 with the truth. There is a route, and there is a source. There are many here in the USA. WE must make CJD and all human TSE, of all age groups 'reportable' Nationally and Internationally, with a written CJD questionnaire asking real questions pertaining to route and source of this agent. Friendly fire has the potential to play a huge role in the continued transmission of this agent via the medical, dental, and surgical arena. We must not flounder any longer. ...TSS

Alzheimer's disease causes a progressive dementia that currently affects
over 35 million individuals worldwide and is expected to affect 115 million by
2050 (ref. 1). There are no cures or disease-modifying therapies, and this may
be due to our inability to detect the disease before it has progressed to
produce evident memory loss and functional decline. Biomarkers of preclinical
disease will be critical to the development of disease-modifying or even
preventative therapies2. Unfortunately, current biomarkers for early disease,
including cerebrospinal fluid tau and amyloid-β levels3, structural and
functional magnetic resonance imaging4 and the recent use of brain amyloid
imaging5 or inflammaging6, are limited because they are either invasive,
time-consuming or expensive. Blood-based biomarkers may be a more attractive
option, but none can currently detect preclinical Alzheimer's disease with the
required sensitivity and specificity7. Herein, we describe our lipidomic
approach to detecting preclinical Alzheimer's disease in a group of cognitively
normal older adults. We discovered and validated a set of ten lipids from
peripheral blood that predicted phenoconversion to either amnestic mild
cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease within a 2–3 year timeframe with
over 90% accuracy. This biomarker panel, reflecting cell membrane integrity, may
be sensitive to early neurodegeneration of preclinical Alzheimer's
disease.

A simple blood test has the potential to predict whether a healthy person
will develop symptoms of dementia within two or three years. If larger studies
uphold the results, the test could fill a major gap in strategies to combat
brain degeneration, which is thought to show symptoms only at a stage when it
too late to treat effectively.

The test was identified in a preliminary study involving 525 people aged
over 70. The work identified a set of ten lipid metabolites in blood plasma that
distinguished with 90% accuracy between people who would remain cognitively
healthy from those who would go on to show signs of cognitive impairment.

“These findings are potentially very exciting,” says Simon Lovestone, a
neuroscientist at the University of Oxford, UK, and a coordinator of a major
European public-private partnership seeking biomarkers for Alzheimer's. But he
points out that only 28 participants developed symptoms similar to those of
Alzheimer's disease during the latest work. “So the findings need to be
confirmed in independent and larger studies.”

There is not yet a good treatment for Alzheimer’s disease, which affects 35
million people worldwide. Several promising therapies have been tested in
clinical trials over the last few years, but all have failed. However, those
trials involved people who had already developed symptoms. Many neuroscientists
fear that any benefits of a treatment would be missed in such a study, because
it could be impossible to halt the disease once it has manifested. “We
desperately need biomarkers which would allow patients to be identified — and
recruited into trials — before their symptoms begin,” says Lovestone.

In the blood The latest study, which is published today in Nature
Medicine1, was led by neurologist Howard Federoff of Georgetown University
Medical Center in Washington DC. He and his colleagues tested the participants'
cognitive and memory skills, and took blood samples from them, around once a
year for five years. They used mass spectrometry to analyse the blood plasma of
53 participants with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer’s disease, including
18 who developed symptoms during the study, and 53 who remained cognitively
healthy. They found ten phospholipids that were present at consistently lower
levels in the blood of most people who had, or went on to develop, cognitive
impairment. The team validated the results in a set of 41 further
participants.

“We don’t really know the source of the ten molecules, though we know they
are generally present in cell membranes,” says Federoff. But he proposes that
concentrations of the phospholipids might somehow reflect the breakdown of
neural-cell membranes.

Federoff emphasizes that his results will have to be validated in
independent labs, and in much larger studies: “We also have to look at different
age groups and a more diverse racial mix, and we need longer study
periods.”

Ease of use Monique Breteler, head of epidemiology at the German Centre for
Neurodegenerative Diseases in Bonn, says that a test based on Federoff’s
biomarker set would be advantageously simple. “If you are to screen the
population for those destined to get Alzheimer’s, and who may therefore benefit
from any treatment that is developed,” she says, “then you need to use material
you can access easily, like blood.”

Some groups are looking for molecules present in spinal fluid or biomarkers
based on brain imaging — procedures that are not practical for large-scale use,
she adds.

Other research has found differences in patterns of other molecules in the
blood of people with Alzheimer’s and healthy controls. But such case–control
studies fail to take into account normal variation between individuals, says
Breteler. “In general it is better to do a prospective study, like this one, so
you can follow how measurements in each individual change as their life
progresses.”

Alzheimer's Association 2013 Alzheimer's Disease Facts and Figures Today,
an American develops Alzheimer's disease every 68 seconds. In 2050, an American
will develop the disease every 33 seconds.

An estimated 5.2 million Americans of all ages have Alzheimer's disease in
2013. This includes an estimated 5 million people age 65 and older and
approximately 200,000 individuals younger than age 65 who have younger-onset
Alzheimer's.

Alzheimer’s disease and Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy disease
have both been around a long time, and was discovered in or around the same time
frame, early 1900’s. Both diseases are incurable and debilitating brain disease,
that are in the end, 100% fatal, with the incubation/clinical period of the
Alzheimer’s disease being longer (most of the time) than the TSE prion disease.
Symptoms are very similar, and pathology is very similar.

Methods

Through years of research, as a layperson, of peer review journals,
transmission studies, and observations of loved ones and friends that have died
from both Alzheimer’s and the TSE prion disease i.e. Heidenhain Variant
Creutzfelt Jakob Disease CJD.

Results

I propose that Alzheimer’s is a TSE disease of low dose, slow, and long
incubation disease, and that Alzheimer’s is Transmissible, and is a threat to
the public via the many Iatrogenic routes and sources. It was said long ago that
the only thing that disputes this, is Alzheimer’s disease transmissibility, or
the lack of. The likelihood of many victims of Alzheimer’s disease from the many
different Iatrogenic routes and modes of transmission as with the TSE prion
disease.

Conclusions

There should be a Global Congressional Science round table event set up
immediately to address these concerns from the many potential routes and sources
of the TSE prion disease, including Alzheimer’s disease, and a emergency global
doctrine put into effect to help combat the spread of Alzheimer’s disease via
the medical, surgical, dental, tissue, and blood arena’s. All human and animal
TSE prion disease, including Alzheimer’s should be made reportable in every
state, and Internationally, WITH NO age restrictions. Until a proven method of
decontamination and autoclaving is proven, and put forth in use universally, in
all hospitals and medical, surgical arena’s, or the TSE prion agent will
continue to spread. IF we wait until science and corporate politicians wait
until politics lets science _prove_ this once and for all, and set forth
regulations there from, we will all be exposed to the TSE Prion agents, if that
has not happened already.

Ample justification exists on clinical, pathologic, and biologic grounds
for considering a similar pathogenesis for AD and the spongiform virus
encephalopathies. However, the crux of the comparison rests squarely on results
of attempts to transmit AD to experimental animals, and these results have not
as yet validated a common etiology. Investigations of the biologic similarities
between AD and the spongiform virus encephalopathies proceed in several
laboratories, and our own observation of inoculated animals will be continued in
the hope that incubation periods for AD may be even longer than those of CJD.

1. CMO will wish to be aware that a meeting was held at DH yesterday, 4
January, to discuss the above findings. It was chaired by Professor Murray
(Chairman of the MRC Co-ordinating Committee on Research in the Spongiform
Encephalopathies in Man), and attended by relevant experts in the fields of
Neurology, Neuropathology, molecular biology, amyloid biochemistry, and the
spongiform encephalopathies, and by representatives of the MRC and AFRC. 2.
Briefly, the meeting agreed that:

i) Dr Ridley et als findings of experimental induction of p amyloid in
primates were valid, interesting and a significant advance in the understanding
of neurodegenerative disorders;

ii) there were no immediate implications for the public health, and no
further safeguards were thought to be necessary at present; and

iii) additional research was desirable, both epidemiological and at the
molecular level. Possible avenues are being followed up by DH and the MRC, but
the details will require further discussion. 93/01.05/4.1

1. Thank you for showing me Diana Dunstan's letter. I am glad that MRC have
recognized the public sensitivity of these findings and intend to report them in
their proper context. This hopefully will avoid misunderstanding and possible
distortion by the media to portray the results as having more greater
significance than the findings so far justify.

2. Using a highly unusual route of transmission (intra-cerebral injection)
the researchers have demonstrated the transmission of a pathological process
from two cases one of severe Alzheimer's disease the other of
Gerstmann-Straussler disease to marmosets. However they have not demonstrated
the transmission of either clinical condition as the "animals were behaving
normally when killed'. As the report emphasizes the unanswered question is
whether the disease condition would have revealed itself if the marmosets had
lived longer. They are planning further research to see if the conditions, as
opposed to the partial pathological process, is transmissible. What are the
implications for public health?

3. The route of transmission is very specific and in the natural state of
things highly unusual. However it could be argued that the results reveal a
potential risk, in that brain tissue from these two patients has been shown to
transmit a pathological process. Should therefore brain tissue from such cases
be regarded as potentially infective? Pathologists, morticians, neuro surgeons
and those assisting at neuro surgical procedures and others coming into contact
with "raw" human brain tissue could in theory be at risk. However, on a priori
grounds given the highly specific route of transmission in these experiments
that risk must be negligible if the usual precautions for handling brain tissue
are observed.

92/11.4/1-1 BSE101/1 0137

4. The other dimension to consider is the public reaction. To some extent
the GSS case demonstrates little more than the transmission of BSE to a pig by
intra-cerebral injection. If other prion diseases can be transmitted in this way
it is little surprise that some pathological findings observed in GSS were also
transmissible to a marmoset. But the transmission of features of Alzheimer's
pathology is a different matter, given the much greater frequency of this
disease and raises the unanswered question whether some cases are the result of
a transmissible prion. The only tenable public line will be that "more research
is required" before that hypothesis could be evaluated. The possibility on a
transmissible prion remains open. In the meantime MRC needs carefully to
consider the range and sequence of studies needed to follow through from the
preliminary observations in these two cases. Not a particularly comfortable
message, but until we know more about the causation of Alzheimer's disease the
total reassurance is not practical.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first
150 words of the full text.

KEYWORDS: creutzfeldt-jakob disease, diagnosis.

To the Editor:

In their Research Letter, Dr Gibbons and colleagues1 reported that the
annual US death rate due to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) has been stable
since 1985. These estimates, however, are based only on reported cases, and do
not include misdiagnosed or preclinical cases. It seems to me that misdiagnosis
alone would drastically change these figures. An unknown number of persons with
a diagnosis of Alzheimer disease in fact may have CJD, although only a small
number of these patients receive the postmortem examination necessary to make
this diagnosis. Furthermore, only a few states have made CJD reportable. Human
and animal transmissible spongiform encephalopathies should be reportable
nationwide and internationally.

An update on atypical BSE and other TSE in North America. Please remember,
the typical U.K. c-BSE, the atypical l-BSE (BASE), and h-BSE have all been
documented in North America, along with the typical scrapie's, and atypical
Nor-98 Scrapie, and to date, 2 different strains of CWD, and also TME. All these
TSE in different species have been rendered and fed to food producing animals
for humans and animals in North America (TSE in cats and dogs ?), and that the
trading of these TSEs via animals and products via the USA and Canada has been
immense over the years, decades.

Methods:

12 years independent research of available data

Results:

I propose that the current diagnostic criteria for human TSEs only enhances
and helps the spreading of human TSE from the continued belief of the UKBSEnvCJD
only theory in 2009. With all the science to date refuting it, to continue to
validate this old myth, will only spread this TSE agent through a multitude of
potential routes and sources i.e. consumption, medical i.e., surgical, blood,
dental, endoscopy, optical, nutritional supplements, cosmetics etc.

Conclusion:

I would like to submit a review of past CJD surveillance in the USA, and
the urgent need to make all human TSE in the USA a reportable disease, in every
state, of every age group, and to make this mandatory immediately without
further delay. The ramifications of not doing so will only allow this agent to
spread further in the medical, dental, surgical arena's. Restricting the
reporting of CJD and or any human TSE is NOT scientific. Iatrogenic CJD knows NO
age group, TSE knows no boundaries. I propose as with Aguzzi, Asante, Collinge,
Caughey, Deslys, Dormont, Gibbs, Gajdusek, Ironside, Manuelidis, Marsh, et al
and many more, that the world of TSE Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy is
far from an exact science, but there is enough proven science to date that this
myth should be put to rest once and for all, and that we move forward with a new
classification for human and animal TSE that would properly identify the
infected species, the source species, and then the route.

Article abstract--Based on 54 demented patients consecutively autopsied at
the University of Pittsburgh, we studied the accuracy of clinicians in
predicting the pathologic diagnosis. Thirty-nine patients (72.2%) had
Alzheimer's disease, while 15 (27.7%) had other CNS diseases (four multi-infarct
dementia; three Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease; two thalamic and subcortical gliosis;
three Parkinson's disease; one progressive supranuclear palsy; one Huntington's
disease; and one unclassified). Two neurologists independently reviewed the
clinical records of each patient without knowledge of the patient's identity or
clinical or pathologic diagnoses; each clinician reached a clinical diagnosis
based on criteria derived from those of the NINCDS/ADRDA. In 34 (63 %) cases
both clinicians were correct, in nine (17%) one was correct, and in 11 (20%)
neither was correct. These results show that in patients with a clinical
diagnosis of dementia, the etiology cannot be accurately predicted during
life.

NEUROLOGY 1989;39:76-79

Several recent papers and reports have addressed the problem of improving
the clinician's ability to diagnose dementia. Notable among those reports are
the diagnostic criteria for dementia of the American Psychiatric Association,
known as DSM III,1 as well as the clinical and neuropathologic criteria for the
diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD).2,3 Other researchers have published
guidelines for the differentiation of various types of dementia4 and for
antemortem predictions about the neuropathologic findings of demented
patients.5

Most studies on the accuracy of clinical diagnosis in patients with
dementia, especially AD, have used clinicopathologic correlation,6-15 and have
found a percentage of accuracy ranging from 43% to 87%. Two recent reports,
however,16,17 have claimed an accuracy of 100%. These two reports are based on
relatively small series and have consisted of very highly selected patient
samples. In our own recent experience, several cases of dementia have yielded
unexpected neuropathologic findings,18 and we hypothesized that, in larger
series, there would be a significant number of discrepancies between clinical
diagnoses and autopsy findings. The present paper reviews the neuropathologic
diagnosis of 54 demented patients who were autopsied consecutively at the
University of Pittsburgh over a 7-year period, and reports the ability of
clinicians to predict autopsy findings.

Material and methods. We independently reviewed the pathologic data and
clinical records of 54 consecutive patients who had had an autopsy at the
University of Pittsburgh (Presbyterian University Hospital [PUH] and the
Pittsburgh (University Drive) Veterans Administration Medical Center [VAMC]),
between 1980 and 1987.

The 54 cases included all those where dementia was diagnosed clinically but
for which an obvious etiology, such as neoplasm, trauma, major vascular lesions,
or clinically evident infection had not been found. The brains, evaluated by the
Division of Neuropathology of the University of Pittsburgh, were obtained from
patients cared for in different settings at their time of death.

On the basis of the amount of information available in each case, we
divided the patients into three groups. Group 1 included 12 subjects who had
been followed for a minimum of 1 year by the Alzheimer Disease Research Center
(ADRC) of the University of Pittsburgh. ADRC evaluations include several visits
and neurologic and neuropsychological testing as well as repeated laboratory
tests, EEG, and CT.19,20

Group 2 included 28 patients who had been seen in the Neurology Service of
PUH, of the VAMC, or in geriatric or psychiatric facilities of the University of
Pittsburgh or at Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic. All patients were
personally evaluated by a neurologist and received a work-up to elucidate the
etiology of their dementia.

Group 3 included 14 patients seen in other institutions; in most cases,
they had also been seen by a neurologist and had had laboratory studies that
included CT of the head. In three of the 14 cases, however, the information
could be gathered only from the clinical summary found in the autopsy
records.

Many of these subjects were referred for autopsy to the ADRC because of a
public education campaign that encourages families to seek an autopsy for their
relatives with dementia.

Pathologic data. All brains were removed by a neuropathologist as the first
procedure of the autopsy at postmortem intervals of between 4 and 12 hours. The
unfixed brain was weighed and the brainstem and cerebellum were separated by
intercollicular section. The cerebral hemispheres were sectioned at 1-cm
intervals and placed on a glass surface cooled by ice to prevent adhesion of the
tissue to the cutting surface. The brainstem and cerebellum were sectioned in
the transverse plane at 6-mm intervals. Brain sections were fixed in 10%
buffered formalin. Selected tissue blocks for light microscopy were obtained
from sections corresponding as exactly as possible to a set of predetermined
areas used for processing brains for the ADRC protocol; additional details of
the neuropathologic protocol have been previously published.18,21 Following
standard tissue processing and paraffin embedding, 8-um-thick sections stained
with hematoxylin and eosin and with the Bielschowsky ammoniacal silver nitrate
impregnation were evaluted. Additional stains were used when indicated by the
survey stains, including the Bielschowsky silver technique as previously
reported.21

Clinical data. The medical history, as well as the results of examinations
and laboratory tests, were obtained from the medical records libraries of the
institutions where the patient had been followed and had died. We supplemented
these data, when appropriate, with a personal or telephone interview with the
relatives.

One neurologist (O.L.L.) recorded the information to be evaluated on two
forms. The first form included sex, age, handedness, age at onset, age at death,
course and duration of the disease, education, family history, EEG, CT, NMR,
medical history, and physical examinationas well as examination of blood and CSF
for factors that could affect memory and other cognitive functions. The form
also listed the results of neuropsychological assessment, and the
characteristics and course of psychiatric and neurologic symptoms. The form
provided details on the presence, nature, and course of cognitive deficits and
neurologic signs. The second form was a 26-item checklist derived from the
NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group Criteria for probable Alzheimer's disease.2 The forms
did not include the patient's identity, the institution where they had been
evaluated, the clinical diagnosis, or the pathologic findings.

Each form was reviewed independently by two other neurologists (F.B. and
J.M.), who were asked to provide a clinical diagnosis. In cases of probable or
possible AD, the two neurologists followed the diagnostic criteria of the
NINCDS/ ADRDA work group.2

The results were tabulated on a summary sheet filled out after the two
neurologists had provided their diagnosis on each case. The sheet included the
diagnosis reached by the two neurologists and the diagnosis resulting from the
autopsy.

Table 1. Pathologic diagnosis in 54 patients with dementia

N %

Alzheimer's disease alone 34 62.9

Alzheimer's disease and 2 3.7 Parkinsons's disease

Alzheimer's disease with 2 3.7 multi-infarct dementia

Alzheimer's disease with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis 39 72.2

Total Alzheimers disease 39 72.2

Multi-infarct dementia 4 7.4

Multi-infarct dementa 1 1.8 with Parkinson's disease

Parkinson's disease 2 3.7

Progressive subcortical gliosis 2 3.7

Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease 3 5.5

Progressive supranuclear palsy 1 1.8

Huntington's disease 1 1.8

Unclassified 1 1.8

Total other disease 15 27.7

Total all cases 54

Table 2. Clinical diagnosis

Clinical diagnosis Clinician #1 --- #2

Probable AD 29 21

Probable AD and MID 3 0

Probable AD and thyroid disease 1 2

Probable AD and PD 3 1

Probable AD and ALS 1 0

Probable AD and 0 1 olivopontocerebellar degeneration

Total probable AD 37 25 (68.5%) (46.2%)

Possible AD 3 2

Possible AD and MID 2 2

Possible AD and alcoholism 0 1

Possible AD and depression 1 0

Possible and thyroid disease 0 3

Possible AD and traumatic 1 2 encephalopathy

Possible AD and PD 3 6

Total Possible AD 10 16 (18.5%) (29.6%)

Atypical AD 0 1

Atuypical AD and MID 0 1

MID 2 4

MID and PD 3 0

Dementia syndrome of depression 0 1

HD 1 1

Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome 1 0

Dementia of unknown etiology 0 5

Total 54 54

Results. The subjects included 26 women and 28 men who ranged in age from
30 to 91 years (mean, 72.2; SD, 10.7).

Twenty-two of the 39 AD patients (56%) were age 65 or greater at the time
of the onset of the disease. Seven of the 15 patients in the group with other
diseases (47%) were age 65 or older at the time of disease onset.

Clinical diagnosis. There was a general adherence to the criteria specified
by McKhann et al.2 However, the two clinicians in this study considered the
diagnosis of probable AD when the probability of AD was strong even if a patient
had another disease potentially associated with dementia that might or might not
have made some contribution to the patient's clinical state (table 2).

Accuracy of the clinical diagnosis (table 3). Group 1 (N = 12). There were
six men and six women. Ten cases (83.3%) met the histologic criteria for AD. In
nine cases (75.0%), the diagnosis of both clinicians agreed with the pathologic
findings; in the other case (8.3%), one clinical diagnosis agreed with the
histologic findings. The remaining two cases (16.6%) had histopathologic
diagnoses of CJD and progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), respectively. Both
cases were incorrectly diagnosed by both clinicians.

Group 2 (N = 28). There were 11 women and 17 men. Eighteen cases (64.2%)
had the histopathologic features for AD with or without additional findings.
Sixteen of these cases (57.1%) were correctly diagnosed by both clinicians, one
case by one of them, and both incorrectly diagnosed one case. The remaining ten
cases (35.7%) included two with CJD; two with subcortical gliosis (SG); two with
PD, one of which was associated with MID; one case of Huntington's disease (HD);
two cases with MID; and one unclassifed. Only one, the HD case (3.5%), was
correctly diagnosed by both observers, and four cases (14.2%), two MID and two
PD, one associated with MID, were correctly diagnosed by one clinician.

Group 3 (N = 14). In this group there were nine women and five men. Eleven
cases (78.5%) met the histopathologic criteria for AD with or without additional
findings. Eight of these cases (57.1%) were correctly diagnosed by both
clinicians, two cases by one of them, while both were incorrect in one case. Of
the remaining three cases (21.4%), only one was correctly diagnosed (7.1%) by
one clinician. Both missed the two other cases of MID.

There was no statistically significant difference in diagnostic agreement
across patient groups in which the amount of clinical information was different
(X2 = 1.19; p > 0.05).

* Certain differences in methodology need clarification. Some
authors7,8,10,11,12,13,16,17 tabulated patients with AD alone, and others9,14,15
included patients with AD plus other diseases, eg, Parkinson's disease and MID.
We have combined AD alone and AD plus MID and other neurodegenerative
diseases.

Discussion. Our results indicate that in a population of patients with
dementias of varied etiology, the diagnosis could be correctly inferred by at
least one of two clinicians in approximately 80% of cases. For one observer, the
sensitivity of clinical diagnosis for AD was 85% and the specificity was 13%,
and for the other, it was 95% and 33% respectively.

In the cases with a discrepancy between the clinical diagnosis and the
neuropathologic findings, the great majority of patients had atypical clinical
courses and findings. The three cases with autopsy findings of CJD had a much
longer course than is usually seen with that condition and failed to show the
usual EEG abnormalities. The patient with autopsy findings of PSP did not show
the disorder in the extraocular movements usually associated with that
condition. An atypical course was also present for two AD cases and two MID
cases that did not have any feature suggestive of vascular disease. In one MID
case, the CT did not show any focal lesions, while in the other it was not
available. With regard to the two patients with SG, the pathologic diagnosis is
so unusual and so infrequently recorded that clear clinical correlates are not
evident.18 The third category of possible error is the patient listed as
unclassified, for whom no specific neuropathologic diagnosis could be
reached.22

The small number of neuropathologic diagnoses of Parkinson's disease
reflects that, for the purpose of this series, the diagnosis of PD was made only
when there were both a clear-cut clinical history and the neuropathologic
findings characteristic of the disease, such as Lewy bodies, neuronal loss,
globose neurofibrillary tangles, astrocytosis, and extraneuronal melanin pigment
in substantia nigra and locus ceruleus.

Are these results derived from a sample of 54 patients representative of
disease patterns in the community? Generally, the diagnosis of patients reported
from major medical centers tend to be biased since the more complicated cases
are referred there. In this study, however, this bias may be less important. Due
to the major public education campaign about dementia and AD sponsored by the
ADRC, there is a widespread awareness in Pittsburgh and in the surrounding
regions of Western Pennsylvania of the value of an autopsy for a definitive
diagnosis. Therefore, the great majority of cases were referred to us because
the family wanted to know the precise etiology of a case of dementia.

The significant improvement in the clinical diagnosis of AD is a recent
phenomenon. Due to the publicity and the advances in communication of scientific
investigations, most physicians are more likely to consider AD as the main cause
of dementia. The current risk of overdiagnosing AD reminds one of what occurred
during the 1960s with the diagnosis of "atherosclerotic dementia."6 The high
sensitivity and low specificity for AD shown in our study may reflect that
possibility.

Because of the varying criteria for "other dementias" in many publications,
we chose to analyze the accuracy of clinical diagnosis in terms of the diagnosis
of AD alone or AD plus other neuropathologic findings. Several retrospective
studies have attempted to point out reliable clinical and pathologic features
for diagnosing the dementias, especially AD. The study of Tomlinson et al6 is
not included in table 4 because there was no attempt to validate the clinical
diagnosis with pathologic findings. The reports surveyed vary considerably in
size and methodology. Sample size, for example, ranges from 26 subjects9 to 776
subjects.7 Some studies base the diagnosis on limited clinical
information,7'9'14'15 others use widely accepted diagnostic criteria such as
those specified in DSM III,13 and one group uses a standardized clinical
assessment of patients enrolled in a longitudinal study.12 The reported accuracy
of the clinical diagnosis of AD ranges from 43%7 to 87%.15

Recent prospective studies that adhere to strict clinical criteria,10'11'17
those in DSM III8 or those proposed by McKhann et al,16 indicate improved
accuracy of clinical diagnosis of the most common causes of dementia, especially
AD. In sample sizes ranging from 11 subjects16 to 58 subjects,l0 the accuracy of
clinical diagnosis is reported as ranging from 71%10 to 100%16'17' Only two
series, both based on small samples, report a 100% accuracy. We consider it
unlikely that such accuracy could be confirmed in large series because of some
inevitable imprecision in clinical diagnoses and the variability of clinical
pictures. Furthermore, although researchers generally agree on the application
of uniform criteria in clinical diagnosis of dementia, opinions still differ
about specific diagnostic criteria, as well as about the pathologic
characterization of dementia. Except for those small series, the results
summarized in table 4(7-15) is are remarkably consistent with ours.

In table 3, although there was no statistical difference (p > 0.05) in
diagnostic agreement across patient groups, there is a trend toward a lower
percentage of diagnostic errors for the patients who had been followed most
intensely (16% in group 1 compared with 21% in groups 2 and 3). The difference
is not great, and it is, in fact, surprising to find out that in the patients
about whom relatively little was known (group 3) the percentage of diagnostic
error was the same as among patients seen by neurologists and for whom much more
data were available (group 2). These paradoxical findings probably indicate that
both clinicians learned to extract essential diagnostic criteria2 in spite of
the variations in the amount of information available for consideration. It may
well be that clinical, radiographic, and laboratory assessment of patients with
dementia is burdened with information that is excessive and unessential for
purely diagnostic purposes.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. A. Julio Martinez and Dr. Gutti Rao from the Division of
Neuropathology for autopsy data. Mrs. Margaret Forbes, Ms. Annette Grechen, and
Mrs. Paula Gent helped in the preparation of the manuscript.

Supported in part by NIH Grants nos. AG05133 and AG03705, NIMH Grant no.
MH30915, by funds from the Veterans Admin., and by the Pathology Education and
Research Foundation (PERF) of the Department of Pathology, University of
Pittsburgh.

Presented in part at the fortieth annual meeting of the American Academy of
Neurology, Cincinnati. OH, April 1988.

Received April 7, 1988. Accepted for publication in final form July 20,
1988.

· To identify those patients most likely to benefit from a cerebral biopsy
to diagnose dementia, we reviewed a series of 14 unselected biopsies performed
during a 9-year period (1980 through 1989) at Duke University Medical Center,
Durham, NC. Pathognomonic features allowed a definitive diagnosis in seven
specimens. Nondiagnostic abnormalities but not diagnostic neuropathologic
changes were seen in five additional specimens, and two specimens were normal.
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was the most frequent diagnosis. One patient each was
diagnosed as having Alzheimer's disease, diffuse Lewy body disease, adult-onset
Niemann-Pick disease, and anaplastic astrocytoma. We conclude that a substantial
proportion of patients presenting clinically with atypical dementia are likely
to receive a definitive diagnosis from a cerebral biopsy. However, in those with
coexisting hemiparesis, chorea, athetosis, or lower motor neuron signs, cerebral
biopsies are less likely to be diagnostic. (Arch Neurol. 1992;49:28-31)

"Dementia" is a syndrome characterized by global deterioration of cognitive
abilities and is the general term used to describe the symptom complex of
intellectual deterioration in the adult. It is associated with multiple causes,
although Alzheimer's disease (AD) alone accountsfor approximately 60% of
cases.1-3

Interest in the accuracy of the diagnosis of dementia is a relatively
recent phenomenon, reflecting both an increase in physicians' awareness of
multiple specific causes of dementia and a marked increase in both the incidence
and prevalence of dementia associated with the increase in the elderly
population.4' The clinical evaluation remains the key to the differential
diagnosis, and in most cases dementia can be diagnosed accurately by clinical
criteria. However, the definitive diagnoses of AD.1'5'7 Pick's disease,8'10
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD),11-16 Binswanger's disease,17'18' and diffuse
Lewy body disease19-22 still require histologic examination of the cortex to
identify characteristic structural changes.

Brain tissue is almost invariably obtained at autopsy, and the vast
majority of pathologic diagnoses are thus made post mortem. Alternatively, an
antemortem histologic diagnosis can be provided to the patient and his or her
family if a cerebral biopsy is performed while the patient is still alive.
Because brain biopsies for dementia are not routinely performed, we sought to
define the spectrum of pathologic changes seen in a retrospective unselected
series of adult patients undergoing cerebral biopsy for the diagnosis of
atypical dementing illnesses and to determine the patient selection criteria
most likely to result in a definitive diagnosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cerebral biopsies performed solely for the diagnosis of dementia in adult
patients were identified by a manual search of the patient files of the Division
of Neuropathology, Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC, and by a
computerized search of discharge diagnoses of patients undergoing brain
biopsies. Fourteen cases were identified from the period 1980 to 1989. Patients
undergoing biopsies for suspected tumor, inflammation, or demyelinating disease
were excluded. A clinical history of dementia was an absolute requirement for
inclusion in the study. Diagnosis was based on Dignostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders, Third Edition, and on National Institute of Neurological
and Communicative Disorders and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders
Association (ADRDA) criteria for probable AD.23

The published recommendations for handling tissue from patients with
suspected CJD were followed in every case.24-26 Briefly, tissue was transported
in double containers clearly marked "Infectious Disease Precations." Double
gloves, aprons, and goggles were used at all times. Tissue was fixed in
saturated phenol in 3.7% phosphate-buffered formaldehyde for 48 hours25 and
subsequently hand processed for paraffin embedding. At least 1 cm(to 3 power) of
tissue was available for examination from each patient, except for patient 7,
who underwent bilateral temporal lobe needle biopsies. Patient 14 underwent
biopsy of both frontal and temporal lobes.

One paraffin block was prepared for each biopsy specimen, and sections were
routinely stained with hematoxylin-eosin, luxol fast blue, Congo red, alcian
blue, periodic acidSchiff, and modified King's silver stain27 in every ease,
except for case 7, in which the diagnosis was made by frozen section. Portions
of both gray and white matter were primarily fixed in glutaraldehyde and
embedded in epoxy resin (Epon). Tissue was examined by electron microscopy if
abnormalities, such as neuronal storage or other inclusions, were seen in
routine paraffin sections.

Khachaturian's5 National Institute of Neurological and Communicative
Disorderers and Stroke/ADRDA criteria for quantitation of senile plaques and the
diagnosis of AD were used in all cases after 1985. At the time of our, study,
these criteria were also applied retrospectively to cases accessioned before
1985. No attempt was made to grade the severityof other abnormalities (eg,
gliosis and spongiform change), and the original pathologic diagnoses were not
revised.

RESULTS

The clinical presentations, biopsy findings, and follow-up data, including
postoperative complications, are summarized in Table 1 for all 14 patients.
Their biopsy findings are summarized in Table 2.

The ages of this unselected group of 14 patients who underwent cerebral
biopsies for dementia ranged from 32 to 78 years (mean, 51.6 years). There were
seven men and seven women. Duration of symptoms ranged from 1 month to 6 years
(mean, 2.3 years). No differences were noted between the group with diagnostic
biopsies (cases 1 through 7) and the group with nondiagnostic biopsies (cases 8
through 14) with regard to age at the time of biopsy or duration of symptoms.
However, five of seven patients in the nondiagnostic group had hemiparesis,
chorea, athetosis, or lower motor neuron signs. None of these findings was
present in the patients with diagnostic biopsies. Visual disturbances, abnormal
eye movements, and ataxia were present in four of seven cases with diagnostic
biopsies but were absent in the group with nondiagnostic biopsies.

In this series of 14 patients, two experienced postoperative complications,
one of which was severe. Patient 2 developed an intraparenchymal parietal cortex
hemorrhage and was mute after biopsy. Patient 9 developed a subdural hygroma
that was treated uneventfully.

Eight patients died 1 month to 9 years after biopsy. An autopsy was
performed in five of these eight patients. One of these patients (patient 4) had
a firm diagnosis of presenile AD on biopsy, which was confirmed at autopsy.
Patient 3 had a biopsy diagnosis of CJD, which was also confirmed at autopsy.
Two patients with only white-matter gliosis diagnosed at biopsy had autopsy
diagnoses of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis with dementia (patient 8) and CJD
(patient 9). One patient in whom a biopsy specimen appeared to be normal had
Huntington disease identified at autopsy (patient 14). At the time of this
writing, four patients are still alive, two are in clinically stable condition 1
to 2 years after biopsy, and two are severely demented 2 to 3 years after
biopsy. Two patients (one with a definite and one with a possible diagnosis of
CJD) have been unavailable for follow-up.

COMMENT Our study of patients presenting with atypical dementia reaffirms
the diagnostic utility of cerebral biopsy. In selected cases, cerebral biopsy
results in a high yield of definitive diagnostic information. A wide variety of
disorders may be encountered, including CJD, AD, diffuse Lewy body disease, and
storage disorders, such as Niemann-Pick disease.28-30 The diagnosis of
Niemann-Pick disease type C was confirmed by assay of cholesterol esterification
in cultured fibroblasts31'32' with markedly abnormal results in one patient, who
was described in detail elsewhere.33

One example of an unsuspected anaplastic astrocytoma (case 7) was also
encountered. This case was unusual in light of currently used sensitive imaging
techniques. This patient may have been suffering from gliomatosis cerebri.

Positron emission tomography showed multiple areas of increased uptake,
even though the magnetic resonance image was nondiagnostic and showed only
subtle increased signal intensity on review. Bilateral temporal lobe needle
biopsies yielded abnormal findings. Biopsy of the right side showed only
reactive gliosis, which may have been adjacent to tumor. Biopsy of the left
side, performed 3 days later, was diagnostic for anaplastic astrocytoma.
Unfortunately, permission for an autopsy was refused, and complete evaluation of
the underlying pathologic process thus must remain speculative.

The high incidence of definite and probable CJD in our series indicates
that it is imperative that appropriate precautions are taken to prevent the
transmission 0f disease to health care workers when biopsy tissue from patients
with dementia is handled.24-26

At our institution, cerebral biopsy for the diagnosis of dementia is
reserved for patients with an unusual clinical course or symptoms that cannot be
diagnosed with sufficient certainty by other means. In most instances, cerebral
biopsy is unnecessary and is clearly not a procedure to be proposed for routine
diagnostic evaluation. In all cases, extensive clinical, metabolic,
neuropsychological and radiologic evaluations must be performed before cerebral
biopsy is considered. In addition, preoperative consultations among
neurologists, neurosurgeons, neuroradiologists, and neuropathologists are
necessary to ascertain the optimal biopsy site given the clinical data to ensure
that maximal infornmtion is derived from the biopsy tissue.

An optimal biopsy specimen is one that is taken from an affected area,
handled to eliminate artifact, and large enough to include both gray and white
matter.34 Open biopsy is generally preferred because it is performed under
direct visualization and does not distort the architecture of the cerebral
cortex. This method also provides sufficient tissue (approximately 1 cm3) to
perform the required histologic procedures.

Some physicians question the utility of diagnostic cerebral biopsies in
dementia, stating that the procedure is unlikely to help the patient. While it
is frequently true that the diagnoses made are untreatable with currently
available therapeutic modalities, this is by no means universally true. Kaufman
and Catalano35 noted that cerebral biopsy has revealed specific treatable
illnesses, such as meningoencephalitis and multiple sclerosis. Our patient with
anaplastic astrocytoma (patient 7) underwent radiation therapy, although she
quickly died of her disease. Furthermore, when a definitive diagnosis can be
made, even of incurable illnesses, such as CJD and AD, it is often possible to
give an informed prognosis to the family and to help them plan for the
future.

The formulation of indications, for diagnostic cerebral biopsy raises
difficult and complex issues. In 1986, Blemond36 addressed the clinical
indications and the legal and moral aspects of cerebral biopsy, and his
recommendations remain valid today: (1)The patient has a chronic progressixe
cerehral disorder with documented dementia. (2) All other possible diagnostic
methods have already been tried and have failed to provide sufficient diagnostic
certainty. (3) The general condition of the patient permits cerebral biopsy. (4)
Several specialists are in agreement regarding the indication. (5) Informed
consent is obtained from relatives. (6) Modern diagnostic tools, such as
immunocytochemistry and electron microscopy, are used to the fullest capacity in
the examination of the material obtained.

As with any intracranial surgical procedure involving the cerebral cortex,
the risks of cerebral biopsy include anesthetic complications, hemorrhage,
infections, and seizures. Guthkelch37 stated that the mortality associated with
brain biopsy is not greater than that associated with general anesthesia.
Cerebral biopsy, however can result in substantial morbidity. In our series, two
of 14 patients suffered operative complications, intraparenchymal hemorrhage in
one patient (patient 2) resulted in aphasia, while another patient (patient 10)
developed a subdural hygroma, which was successfully treated, and recovered her
baseline status.

The current diagnostic accuracy of cerebral biopsy in the evaluation of
dementia is unknown. Most of the larger general series 34'38-41 were reported
before computed tomography was available and included many pediatric cases
presenting with genetic neurodegenerative disorders that are now more readily
diagnosed by other means. For adults with dementia, less information is
available. Katzman et al4 recently reviewed the literature concerning the
diagnostic accuracy of cerebral biopsy for dementia and concluded that 75% of
these procedures result in diagnostic material. Patient selection is very
important, and the literature is heavily weighted toward patients with a
clinical diagnosis of AD.35'42-44 Our study thus provides documentation of the
diagnostic accuracy of cerebral biopsies in unselected patients with atypical
dementia.

Autopsy follow-up is imperative in any dementia program,2 as a definitive
diagnosis will not be made in a substantial proportion of patients. In our
series, three patients died without a diagnosis, and autopsy was performed in
all three. The diagnostic features were not present in the cortical area in
which the biopsy was performed. In case 8, examination of the spinal cord
revealed amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Diffuse gliosis of the white matter was
noted, which was the pathologic basis of the patient's dementia. In case 9. the
spongiform change of CJD was focal, according to the pathologist's report;
unfortunately, the tissue was not available for our review. In case 14, the
diagnosis of Huntington's disease grade II/IV was made after close examination
of the caudate nucleus. As one might predict, fewer autopsies were performed in
the group with diagnostic biopsies; only two of five deaths in this category
were followed by postmortem examinations. The diagnosis of AD was confirmed in
case 4. In ease 3, the biopsy diagnosis of CJD was confirmed.

In summary, a series of 14 unselected cerebral biopsies performed for the
diagnosis of atypical dementia was reviewed to define the spectrum of pathologic
changes seen and to estimate the likelihood of obtaining diagnostic tissue.
Histologic diagnoses of CJD, AD, diffuse Lewy body disease, Niemann-Pick disease
type C, or anaplastic astrocytoma were made in seven patients. The high
incidence of CJD in this population (four of 14 cases) emphasizes the need to
use appropriate precautions when tissue from patients with unusual dementing
illnesses is handled. Consultation among neurologist, neurosurgeons,
neuroradiologists, and neuropathologists is essential to select appropriate
patients and to choose the proper biopsy site. Demented patients with coexisting
hemiparesis, chorea, athetosis, or lower motor neuron signs are unlikely to
benefit from cortical biopsy.

This investigation was supported by Clinical Investigator Award PHS
AG-00446 from the National Institute on Aging (Dr. Hulette) and by grant PHS
SP50AG05128-03 from the Joseph and Kathleen Bryan Alzheimer's Disease Research
Center (Drs Earl and Crain). Dr Hulette is a College of American Pathologists
Foundation Scholar, Northfield, Ill.

Accepted for publication July 11, 1991. From the Department of Pathology,
Division of Neuropathology (Drs Hulette and Crain), the Department of Medicine,
Division of Neurology (Dr Earl), and the Department of Neurobiology (Dr. Crain),
Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.

The object of this study is to investigate whether or not there are
clinical signs and symptoms in patients with dementia that, by themselves or
jointly, can be associated with the pathological diagnosis of Alzheimer's
disease. Twelve patients with dementia were studied, in whom the clinical
diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease was made according to established criteria. A
sample of leptomeninges, cortex and subcortical white matter was obtained from
each patient and was processed for light and electron microscopy. In the cases
in whom neuritic plaques and neurofibrilary tangles were present, pathological
changes were quantified. The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease was confirmed in 5
cases, whereas in 3 patients spongiform encephalopathy was present. In the
remaining patients, the number of neuritic plaques was within normal limits for
the age of the subjects. Comparison of the data in Alzheimer (n = 5) and
non-Alzheimer (n = 7) groups showed an increased, statistically significant
incidence of acalculia, abnormalities of judgment, impairment of abstraction and
primitive reflexes in the former. Although good fitting models were obtained,
none achieved perfect discrimination. The model that included alterations
ofjudgment and acalculia gave the best fit.

Key Words: Alzheimer's disease, dementia

INTRODUCTION

Several signs and symptoms have been described extensively in the various
diseases that lead to dementia. These symptoms include lack of attention,
defective memory, apathy, emotional lability, judgment changes and delirium
(Karp and Mirra 1986). Many of these characteristics, as well as
electrophysiological changes, are said to be shared by different forms of
dementia (McKhann et al 1984). It is the object of this paper to investigate
whether or not, in Alzheimer's disease, there is a constellation ofclinical data
that will allow the clinician to reach the diagnosis without the aid of a brain
biopsy. Address reprint requests to: Dr F Teixeira, Instituto Nacional de
Neurologfa y Neurocirugia, Insurgentes Sur, 3877, Mexico 14269, DF, Mexico.

METHODS

Twelve patients were studied. Because of degeneration of the patient's
brain functions, a detailed medical history was obtained from family members. A
complete clinical examination was performed, including cranial nerves, tone,
reflexes, coordination, gait and proprioception. None ofthese patients had a
history or clinical findings suggestive of other causes of dementia such as
cerebral infarction, trauma to the head, intracranial neoplasia, substance abuse
or systemic or neurological diseases associated with dementia.
Neuropsychological examination was designed by the Division of Psychology of the
National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery so that the exploration could
be adapted to the sociocultural level and schooling of the patients. Basic
neuropsychological exploration investigated

After the studies were completed, the relatives were briefed on the risks
of a brain biopsy and on its nature, i.e., that the biopsies are not curative,
but part of research protocol to study changes in blood-brain barrier in
Alzheimer's disease that is still in process. This protocol was approved by the
Committee for Ethics in Biomedical Research from the National Institute of
Neurology and Neurosurgery. After permission for the biopsy was granted in
writing, a sample of the superior frontal gyrus was taken, as this adds the
least operative time and risk. In addition, quantitative studies by de la Monte
(1989) showed that, in Alzheimer brains, the regional distribution ofplaques and
tangles usually correlates with the distribution of cerebral atrophy. In all of
this study's patients, neuroimaging studies revealed that the frontal gyri were
severely affected.

The s4mple, which included the leptomeninges, cerebral cortex and
subcortical white matter, was divided into 2 parts. The first part of the
specimen was fixed in buffered formalin and embedded in paraffin. Sections were
stained with hematoxylin and eosin; luxol fast blue-cresyl violet was used for
myelin and nerve cells; Bielschowsky and Von Braunmuhl methods were used for
neurofibrillary tangles and neuritic plaques; and Congo Red was used for
amyloid. Immunoperoxidase techniques, using monoclonal mouse antibodies to human
beta amyloid and to amyloyd A4 component (Dako A/S, Denmark), were also applied.
Senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles were counted at 100 x power and 400 x
power, respectively, on the whole surface of the cortex contained in sections
stained with silver methods or immunoperoxidase techniques. Their numbers were
expressed per square millimeter unit. The second part of the specimen was finely
sectioned and fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer, pH 7.4,
post-fixed in 1% osmium tetroxide in the same buffer, dehydrated in acetone and
embedded in Epon. Semithin sections were stained with toluidine blue and
examined under a light microscope. Ultrathin sections, in the silver/grey area
of the spectrum of interference colors, were stained with uranyl acetate and
lead citrate and observed under a Zeiss EMIO transmission electron microscopy.

Attention Concentration Memory Language Fluidity R&D Praxias I&I
VI, P & C .-I.. IL I-I 277 July 1995 Journal ofPsychiatry & Neuroscience
The following packages were used for statistical analysis of the results: BMDP
1990 version on a VAX 11n750, and GLIM 3.77 version on an AT microcomputer with
coprocessor. Pearson's Chi-Square Test and Fisher's Exact Test were used to
compare clinical features.

RESULTS

The results of clinical and laboratory examinations did not rule out
Alzheimer's disease in any of the patients, according to established criteria
(McKhann et al 1984). There were no instances of hypothyroidism, or cardiac,
renal or hepatic malfunction. Cerebrospinal fluid examination was normal in all
patients. Computerized tomographic scanning and magnetic resonance imaging
showed, in all individuals, global cerebral atrophy with marked reduction in
overall crosssectional areas of the brain, an increase of the volume of the
ventricular system and of the subarachnoid space. No areas of cerebral
infarction were seen in any of the images. Results of the basic
neuropsychological exploration are expressed in Table 1. Eighty-eight percent of
the patients showed a marked deterioration of judgment and a similar deficit in
the performance of abstract tasks and calculation. The mean score of the 7
subjects tested for everyday activity scales was 49, which reflects marked
deterioration, and indicates a requirement for permanent assistance and care. In
summary, there was a severe degeneration of superior cerebral functions
involving cortical and subcortical areas. At this advanced stage of dementia, it
is not possible to detect significant differences of involvement among several
areas. Five patients (numbers 8 to 12) were diagnosed as having Alzheimer's
disease with base on morphologic criteria determined by Khachaturian et al
(1985) and Crystal et al (1988). They had numerous neuritic plaques and a
variable density of neurofibrillary tangles. Three patients (5 to 7) showed
numerous small (1 to 12 micrometer in diameter) vacuoles, many of them
confluent, which markedly distorted the neuropil of the cortex. There was severe
astrocytic gliosis. No plaques or tangles were seen in these biopsies, and no
congophilic or A4 positive material was present. Electron microscopy showed that
these vacuoles were located in the cytoplasm of astrocytes and neurons, and
contained cytoplasmic and membranous debris. These cases were diagnosed as
having Jakob-Creutzfeldt disease. Patients 1 to 3 had few neuritic plaques;
their biopsy was reported as being normal for their age. In patient 4, many
neurons were atrophic, with dense nuclei and abundant cytoplasmic lipofuscin.
These neurons were located far from the surgical margins of the specimen and
belonged to all cortical layers. In none of the biopsies were there cytoplasmic
or nuclear abnormal bodies, inflammation, neoplasia or demyelination.

On the basis of the result of the brain biopsy, the patients were divided
into two groups: A (Alzheimer group: patients 8 to 12) and NA (non-Alzheimer
group, patients 1 to 7). Individuals from either group were similar in regard to
age and sex distribution (see Table 2). In many patients, the number of cortical
argyrophilic plaques exceeded by far the minimum established by Khachaturian et
al (1985) for each age. Differences between mean numbers ofplaques and
neurofibrillary tangles in A and NA subjects were highly significant. Time of
evolution tended to be shorter in NA cases, but the difference with the A group
was not significant because of the presence of patient 1, who had an unusually
long course.

Clinico-pathological correlation

Family history

Two patients had one or more first-degree relatives with dementia. Patient
1 was 83 years old at the time of the biopsy, and his intellectual deterioration
had been progressing for 10 years. His sister, aged 71, had a similar clinical
picture with 15 years' evolution. This patient had few argyrophilic plaques and
no neurofibrillary tangles; this pattern was considered within normal limits for
his age. Patient 9, a 52-yearold woman whose diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease
was confirmed by brain biopsy, belonged to an extraordinary family in that her
mother, her maternal grandmother, a brother, a sister and a maternal aunt had
all died after presenting a clinical picture similar to hers. Two other sisters
were demented and still alive. The pattern of inheritance for this family
corresponds to an autosomal dominant. Pearson's Chi-Square Test showed no
statistically significant difference for this variable between the A group and
the NA group.

Seizures

This variable was observed in 3 patients. Patient 8 of the A group, who had
a 36-month history of behavioral changes, presented 3 episodes of generalized
seizures in the last 4 months before being admitted. Patients 5 and 7, with
spongiform encephalopathy, also had convulsive episodes in the last 5 months
before being admitted. The difference of incidence between the two groups was
not significant.

Speech abnormalities

Three out of five patients with Alzheimer's disease presented with speech
abnormalities, characterized by reduced fluidity and problems for expression and
comprehension. Verbal expression was, in the most severely affected patients,
reduced to stereotypes, with no residual ability to communicate ideas. Patient 6
of the NA group had marked problems communicating verbally, and was limited to
mumbling one of the last words said by the interviewer. The statistical
significance for this variable was moderate (p < 0. 1). 278 VoL 20., No.
4,1995 July 1995

All patients with Alzheimer's disease performed adequately at the tests for
coordination, albeit slowly. Among the NA patients, only one woman (number 6)
showed generalized incoordination, with dysmetria and truncal ataxia. There was
no significant difference between the A group and the NA group regarding this
variable.

Delirium

Relatives of most patients from both groups attested to delirious episodes,
with restlessness, visual and auditory hallucination and disorientation. There
was no significant difference between the groups.

Abnormal movements

These movements manifested as intentional tremor of hands. Again, the
difference was not significant. None of the cases diagnosed histologically as
Jakob-Creutzfeldt disease had myoclonic jerks.

Pyramidal abnormalities

Three subjects for each group showed mild generalized spasticity,
gastrocnemial clonus and bilateral Babinski sign. The difference was not
significant.

Primitive reflexes

Suction, searching, palmar and plantar grasping reflexes were present in
all patients with Alzheimer's disease and 3 out of 7 NA individuals. The level
of significance was p <0 .04.="" div="">

Impairment of memory

Impairment involves both short-term and long-term memory consolidation and
retrieval. All patients with Alzheimer's disease were severely affected, as were
5 out of 7 from the NA group. The remaining 2 NA subjects showed a moderate to
slight impairment. There was no statistically significant difference between the
A group and the NA group. Impairment of abstraction, Judgment alterations and
acalculia The first 2 features were characteristic of Alzheimer cases and were
present in all patients. Acalculia was observed in all patients with Alzheimer's
disease but one, in contrast to 1 out of 7 NA cases. In some A individuals,
acalculia presented early in the course of the disease. Regarding all 3
features, there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) between the A group
and the NA group.

There was no significant difference in any ofthese features between the A
group and the NA group.

Incontinence

Although this symptom was more common in the NA group, the difference was,
once more, not significant. Disorientation

Three out of five patients with Alzheimer's disease were disoriented in
time and space, compared with 1 out of 7 NA patients. The difference was not
significant.

Abnormal EEG

Electroencephalographic changes, characterized by deficient organization
and a generalized slow activity was found in all A patients, and in 3 out of 7
NA patients. The significance of the difference was moderate (p < 0.07).

The joint effects of the variables were selected in stages because of the
small sample size. Although good fitting models were obtained, none achieved a
perfect discrimination. Among the models with two variables, alterations in
judgment and acalculia gave the best fit (deviance 4.50 with 9 d]) and only I
patient with Alzheimer's disease was misclassified (see Table 4).

DISCUSSION

The rates of accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease in
several clinico-pathological studies range from 43% to 87% (Joachim et al 1988;
Mosla et al 1985; Muller and Schwartz 1978; Nott and Fleminger 1975; Sulkava et
al 1983; Todorov et al 1975; Wade et al 1987). It should be interesting,
therefore, if selected clinical data could help to reach this diagnosis without
the aid of a brain biopsy. The results of this study show a very significant
association of Alzheimer's disease with the following variables: primitive
reflexes, impairment of abstraction, changes in judgment and acalculia. In
studying the joint effect of 280 VoL 20, No. 4,1995

The sample in this study may be considered small for the purpose of
selecting a set of signs and symptoms that can characterize Alzheimer's disease
clinically. However, it is not an easy task to obtain the permission to perform
a brain biopsy which is of no benefit for the patient when the relative is
informed of the risks involved.

The definite diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease depends on the microscopical
examination of brain tissue, either by autopsy or biopsy. In the USA, the
Alzheimer Disease Research Center of the University of Pittsburgh has launched a
public campaign to encourage relatives of demented patients to request a
postmortem examination of the brain (Boller et al 1989). However, in Mexico, a
similar campaign has enjoyed little success so far for several reasons. The
patient who suffers from Alzheimer's disease usually dies at home. The
relatives, who are already exhausted by the demands of caretaking, obtain a
death certificate from the family physician, and proceed quickly to the funeral
rites. The few families who do request an autopsy are almost invariably denied
admission to the hospital where the patient had been admitted because cadavers
without a death certificate must be sent to the police department for autopsy.
Many patients die in small towns or villages where there are no pathologists,
let alone neuropathologists. Therefore, brain biopsy remains the only
possibility for confirming the clinical diagnosis. It is true that there is no
benefit derived by the patient from this procedure and that he or she faces
surgical and anesthetic risks. In contrast, brain biopsy allows: 1. the
development of new diagnostic procedures that might, in the future, replace it;
2. adequate genetic counselling in cases with an autosomal dominant pattern of
inheritance, so that family members can take part in studies at the molecular
biology level; and 3. the performance of therapeutic trials and of
epidemiological surveys in Mexico.

Familiar aggregation has been demonstrated in 40% of cases of Alzheimer's
disease. In 15% of these cases, the pattern of inheritance was autosomal
dominant (Heston et al 1981). Patient number nine's family is an example of the
latter, and showed an early age of onset.

Vacuolar change, similar to that present in Jakob- Creutzfeldt disease, has
been described in brains of patients with Alzheimer's disease, especially at the
medial temporal isocortex, where it has a high, statistically significant
association with the presence of large numbers of neurofibrillary tangles and
argyrophilic plaques (Smith et al 1987). This study considered the possibility
that cases 5 to 7, diagnosed as Jakob-Creutzfeldt disease, could be, in fact,
Alzheimer cases with this peculiar vacuolar change. A good method for separating
the two entities would be the use of antibodies against prion (Pr-P) proteins
(Tateishi et al 1988), which were, unfortunately, not available to the authors.
However, none of these cases showed positivity for A4 protein, neither had one
single argyrophilic plaque or tangle. Moreover, the biopsies were taken from the
frontal regions, which are reported to be free of involvement in instances of
Alzheimer's disease with vacuolar changes (Smith et al 1987).

Although the diagnosis of probable Alzheimer's disease was made in all of
the patients in this study, according to the criteria established by McKhann et
al (1984), this diagnosis was confirmed in only 47.1% of them. This low rate
might be the result of several factors. The National Institute of Neurology and
Neurosurgery in Mexico City is an institution that concentrates especially on
difficult or unusual cases that are referred from all over the country.
Therefore, it received a biased sample that included as many as 3 cases of
spongiform encephalopathy. In addition, it is important to remember that a
small, 1 cubic centimeter sample of cortex and white matter may not be
representative of the extent of the damage in other areas of the brain, and so,
correlates poorly with the clinical picture. This illustration is particularly
true of cases 1 to 4, which did not fit into any of the pathological entities
that manifest clinically as dementia. To understand more clearly the relation
between damage and clinical impairment, further prospective studies using
autopsy material are needed.

One of our papers (in Alzheimer's Disease Related Disord. 3:100-109, 1989)
in text cites 6 of 46 (13%) of clinical AD as CJD. There may be a later paper
from another lab showing the same higher than expected incidence but I can't put
my hands on it right now. We also have a lot of papers from 1985 on stating that
there are likely many silent (non-clinical) CJD infections, i.e. much greater
than the "tip of the iceberg" of long standing end-stage cases with clinical
symptoms. Hope this helps.

I suppose one of the most disturbing studies I have ever read, was the one
of Gibbs et al, way back, with electrodes that caused CJD, again, and again.

I am not posting this to scare folks, so be it if it does, but I am posting
this for you to see what you are dealing with. ...this study still amazes me.
read it more than once.

please see ;

1: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994 Jun;57(6):757-8

*** Transmission of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease to a chimpanzee by electrodes
contaminated during neurosurgery.

Gibbs CJ Jr, Asher DM, Kobrine A, Amyx HL, Sulima MP, Gajdusek DC.

Laboratory of Central Nervous System Studies, National Institute of

Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health,

Bethesda, MD 20892.

*** Stereotactic multicontact electrodes used to probe the cerebral cortex
of a middle aged woman with progressive dementia were previously implicated in
the accidental transmission of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) to two younger
patients. The diagnoses of CJD have been confirmed for all three cases. More
than two years after their last use in humans, after three cleanings and
repeated sterilisation in ethanol and formaldehyde vapour, the electrodes were
implanted in the cortex of a chimpanzee. Eighteen months later the animal became
ill with CJD. This finding serves to re-emphasise the potential danger posed by
reuse of instruments contaminated with the agents of spongiform
encephalopathies, even after scrupulous attempts to clean them.

Actually, it is nearer 2 per million per year of the population will
develop sporadic CJD, but your lifetime risk of developing sporadic CJD is about
1 in 30,000. So that has not really changed. When people talk about 1 per
million, often they interpret that as thinking it is incredibly rare. They think
they have a 1-in-a-million chance of developing this disease. You haven’t.
You’ve got about a 1-in-30,000 chance of developing it.